Shalamov analysis of stories. Mikhail Mikheev

This article attempts a closed analysis of V. Shalamov's story "The Parcel". Its purpose is to show a high degree of artistic organization of this work, to reveal those deep layers that, due to the brevity of Shalamov's style, are difficult to access at first reading.

1. Elements included in the class alive

The undertaken analysis makes it possible, first of all, to establish in the introductory and concluding parts of the story those obvious parallels of various phenomena that are incomparable in our usual view.

Let's try to compare the following fragments of the introductory (1) and final (2) parts of the story.

(1) “Parcels were issued at the watch. Brigadiers certify the identity of the recipient. Plywood broke and cracked in its own way, like plywood. The local trees broke in a different way, screamed in a different voice. Behind the barrier of benches, people with clean hands in overly neat military uniforms were opening, checking, shaking, giving away. Boxes of parcels, barely alive from a months-long journey, skillfully thrown up, fell to the floor, split ”(23) .

(2) “Life was returning like a dream, the doors opened again: white puffs of steam, lying on the floor, running to the far wall of the barracks, people in white coats, smelling of newness, unwornness, and something that did not move, but alive, collapsed on the floor, grunting.

The orderly, in a bewildered, but respectful pose, bowed before the white sheepskin coats of the tenants.

Your person? - And the caretaker pointed to a lump of dirty rags on the floor.

This is Efremov, - said the orderly.

Will know how to steal other people's firewood.

Yefremov lay next to me on the bunk for many weeks until they took him away, and he died in an invalid town. He was beaten off /78/ "inside" - there were many masters of this business at the mine. He did not complain - he lay and moaned softly" (26-27).

Obviously, a parallel is being drawn between the issuance of parcels and what happened to Efremov, between plywood boxes and Efremov. “Both” are dealt with by the guards or caretakers, “both” falls to the floor (“fell to the floor” / “something that fell to the floor”), both” screams / groans, and in the end: Efremov - dies, boxes - split.

The idea that in camp conditions Efremov turns into a thing is conveyed with the help of those passages where he is described as a certain object, something indefinite, “something”. This can also be seen in the following fragment, where “man”, “lump of Dirty linen”, “Efremov” are in the same row:

Your human? - And the caretaker pointed to dirty rag on the floor.

it Efremov, - said the orderly.

Further noteworthy are the descriptions of the plywood boxes in which the parcels arrived, “barely alive from a journey of many months", and trees that have voice, shout like alive. We see that both boxes and trees are attributed properties that are inherent in living beings; they live their lives (introductory part of the story), and living people appear before us as things (final part). Why the author resorts to such a technique remains a mystery.

There are only three words in the story with the root zhi- (alive, life, alive). They are used at the beginning when talking about boxes, at the end when talking about Efremov, and also in cases in relation to the hero-narrator: the first time - after describing the attack on him: “I barely stayed alive"(25), the second - at the moment of his awakening: "The dream was like oblivion. Life came back like a dream" (23). It is noteworthy that we are not talking about a full-fledged human life. This is life at the level of life of boxes ("barely alive"). Both Efremov and the narrator are living beings, but their lives seem to be "muted". The predominant properties of Efremov turn out to be precisely material properties, the narrator’s life sometimes “serves” somewhere, but returns as a dream.

We find another example of such a “muted life” in Shaparenko’s remark addressed to the hero-narrator: “What is wick how can you give?..” In camp jargon, the word wick means: "a goner in whom there is as much life as a flame on a wick."

Characteristic, in our opinion, is the choice of personal names and surnames of the characters in the analyzed work, a closer examination of which, perhaps, will bring us closer to unraveling the "mystery" of the story. As far as we know, no large-scale study of the role of names in the work of V. Shalamov has been carried out. Let's try /79/ to analyze this issue, based on the material of the story "The Parcel".

It seems that in the approach to the choice of personal names and surnames (excluding for the time being the names of the mountain ranger Andrey Boyko, the head of the camp Kovalenko and the store manager Shaparenko, to which we will return later), a single principle was applied. Consider the following names and surnames mentioned in the story: Efremov, Sintsov, Gubarev, Ryabov, as well as Kirov (the surname of a real-life political figure) and Semyon Sheinin (the name and surname of Kirov, who possibly existed in reality). We will talk not only about the etymology of words denoting names and surnames, but also about the associations that they cause.

Surname Efremov goes back to the Hebrew ephrajim, meaning:

1. proper name (person's name);
2. the name of an Israelite tribe.

According to the Bible, Joseph named his son Ephraim because, he said, "God made me prolific in the land of my suffering." The name of the Israelite tribe comes from the name of its habitat, which literally means " prolific region/land". In both meanings, the central component is called " fertility».

Proper name Semyon also has roots in Hebrew. It is derived from the verb listen. The surname Sheinin is probably formed from the adjective cervical. A surname Sintsov, according to Fedosyuk, has a connection with the noun blue bream. Y. Fedosyuk notes: "The blue is perhaps a person with a bluish complexion." In the explanatory dictionaries of the Russian language, we also find a different meaning of this word: blue bream- A variety of fish. Surname Gubarev(meaning "thick-lipped"), formed from a noun lip; Ryabov- from an adjective pockmarked, etymologically associated with the names of various animals, birds and plants and having a common root with the words Rowan, grouse etc.

The etymology of the above names and surnames shows that they are all formed from words denoting parts of the body, various physical / physiological qualities of a person, or are associated with the world of animals / plants. Considering the etymology of the personal names used by V. Shalamov, we come to the conclusion that in the context of the story, all the phenomena listed above are elements of one class, class alive. The “world of man” and the “sphere of the biological” are not separated, but, on the contrary, form a unity.

One of the important details in the story is, in our opinion, mentioned at the very beginning shag, about which the hero-narrator so dreams. Makhorka - smoking tobacco made from leaves plants with the same name - "mainland shag, Yaroslavl "Squirrel" or "Kremenchug-2" (23). Upon closer examination of the group of words used to describe shag, we find that their meanings are also a kind of reflection of the unity /80/ of the elements combined in the story in one Class. Named in the text Yaroslavl shag (from the name of the city Yaroslavl, in turn formed, as you know, from a male name Yaroslav). Word Kremenchug(name of a city in Ukraine) is etymologically related to the word flint, which means a mineral, “a very hard stone, used primarily to carve fire”, and in its figurative meaning is used to characterize a person with a strong character. This way it appears and the stones come in class alive.

So, plywood boxes and man as a biological being, various objects, animals and people in their " not biological incarnation”, as persons with specific names, live one life in the story. Therefore, in principle, there are no differences in the description of their qualities: they are all elements of the same class. Living, screaming boxes are not just a metaphor. In our opinion, this is a kind of ontological postulate.

Analyzing the poetry of V. Shalamov, E. Shklovsky notes: “... with the author of the Kolyma Notebooks, we are dealing not just with the transfer of human properties to nature, not just with its humanization. This is not only a poetic rapprochement of the two worlds, but their interpenetration, their rare fusion, when one shines through the other.<...>Here there is a sense of a single destiny, a single fate - nature and man, a feeling that largely determines Shalamov's attitude to nature in his poetry. To a certain extent, this statement is also true in relation to the prose of V. Shalamov. However, agreeing in principle with the remark of E. Shklovsky, we believe that in connection with the "Premise" it would be more correct to speak not about the "rapprochement of the two worlds", their "fusion", but precisely about their identification. Essentially, it is about one world - world alive.

Jeffrey Hosking, analyzing Shalamov's prose, also drew attention to "Shalamov's self-identification with rocks, stones and trees, with a basic life force". But, considering the story "The Parcel", we would like to talk not about Shalamov's self-identification with stones, etc. ., but rather about an ontological postulate, although it remains unclear for us whether in this case we are talking only about life in the camp or about life in general.

The similarities and differences between our position and the position of the cited authors indicate that the problem of determining the place of man in nature is essential for Shalamov's worldview. To formulate this problem more precisely, taking into account the entire work of the writer, as well as to determine its nature and significance, is the task of future research.

2. Color

There may be a sense of inclusiveness of the class alive, which unites people, various natural phenomena and objects in the story. /81/ But it is not so. The description of sugar can serve as proof of this. Sugar is clearly opposed to ice:

"These ones blue pieces are not ice! It's sugar! Sugar! Sugar! Another hour will pass, and I will hold these pieces in my hands, and they not will melt. They will only melt in your mouth” (23).

This opposition suggests that ice is excluded from the class of living things, which includes (along with boxes, shag, etc.) products: sugar, bread, prunes, frozen cabbage, butter, etc. In addition, Shalamov's sugar lumps, as can be seen from the above passage, not white(or yellow-white), as we usually meet them in reality, and blue. And this is not accidental either. White color is excluded from descriptions of people, objects and phenomena, united in the class of the living, which basically covers all other colors; in the story, colors such as black (prune), blue (Sintsov), blue are given.

The first time white is mentioned in connection with frosty fog "some unfamiliar figures were moving in the white frosty fog." The second time "white" appears in the description of the dialogue between Boyko and the hero-narrator:

“Sell me those cloaks. I will give you money. One hundred rubles. After all, you won’t bring it to the barracks - they’ll take it away, they’ll tear it out. - And Boyko pointed his finger at white mist'(24).

Here, the "white fog" is something frightening, repulsive, this is a place for those who steal cloaks (and those who steal are involuntarily associated with us with "some unfamiliar figures" mentioned above). Finally, the white color appears three times in the final part of the story, where it is again associated with puffs of frosty steam, as well as with the new coats of tenants (it is interesting that in the latter case the adjective white ranks with the adjective smelly having a negative connotation):

“Life returned like a dream, the doors opened again: white puffs of steam, lying on the floor, running to the far wall of the barracks, people in whites sheepskin coats, stinking from newness, unwornness, and something that collapsed on the floor, not moving, but alive, grunting.

The orderly, in a bewildered, but respectful pose, bowed before white sheepskin coats of foremen" (26).

It seems obvious to us that there is a parallel between the above passage, where our attention is drawn to the cleanliness of new smelly sheepskin coats, and the introductory part of the story, where “people with clean hands in too neat military uniform” issued parcels to prisoners. In the latter case, the white color is not mentioned, but we have no doubt that the cleanliness and excessive neatness of the "killers" of plywood boxes, as well as the whiteness of the tenants' new sheepskin coats and the whiteness of the pair accompanying these foremen, are phenomena of the same order. And people with clean hands in overly neat military uniforms, breaking plywood boxes, and foremen in new /82/ smelly white coats, like ice and frost, can be attributed to one class - the class of objects that threaten the living. This should also include the head of the camp, Kovalenko. This is how his appearance in the barracks is described:

"From clouds of frosty vapor two soldiers came out. One is younger - head of the camp Kovalenko<...>.

Bowlers again! Now I'll show you the bowlers! I'll show you how to spread the dirt! (26)

The head of the camp appears before his subordinates and before the prisoners in a sort of champion of purity, and therefore, probably, can also be classified as "objects that threaten the living." This "excessive purity" is associated in the story with "whiteness", as well as with "frost" and "ice". Dirty but it turns out to be next to elements of a completely different class, a living class (“Your man? - And the caretaker pointed to a lump dirty rags on the floor).

3. Shape

That without which human life seems impossible is contained in one or another "capacity". Efremov became a victim of the "masters" who recaptured him inside so it doesn't seem to be outwardly noticeable. Parcels also have both their "internal" and their "external": "Boxes of parcels" (23). In both cases, what turns out to be important for life is contained in fragile "vessels": for example, food and tobacco - in boxes, a bowler hat, a bag, a small bag, a pea jacket, where prunes fall, a pouch. Everything that warms, protects from the cold and, therefore, sustains life has the form of one or another “vessel”: the stove on which Efremov puts his hands, the chimney where Ryabov warms his hands, boots. But this category does not include oblong objects-capacities that threaten life: a log, a pick, a rifle.

4. Values ​​of life

It is worth asking the question: are there as constituent elements in the class alive Kovalenko and Andrei Boyko? Surname Kovalenko formed from farrier(those. blacksmith), forge, and Boyko is associated with brisk, which means "resolute, resourceful, courageous", as well as "live, fast". Name Andrew(from the Greek "andreios") - "brave, courageous". In this case, proper names have no connection either with parts of the body or with natural phenomena and evoke ideas that are opposite to those evoked by the characters themselves, who bear these surnames.

Kovalenko's "mania of cleanliness" contrasts with what one would expect from a blacksmith ("dirty", "black"). The same could be said about his actions. Unlike the blacksmith, who usually produces, creates metal things, Kovalenko destroys metal objects: pierces the bottom of prisoners' bowlers. The name of the hero means the opposite of what this hero himself is. The same could be said about Andrei Boyko. Boyko is not bold and resolute, but on the contrary: “Boyko was afraid” (24). On the basis of what has been said, it can be argued that Kovalenko and Boyko /83/ are included in a different class than the one that we called the “class of the living”. And if we try to find an explanation for it, we will find it. While the class of the living embraces objects living the same life, belonging to organic and inorganic nature, the other class combines ice, frost, "white", "pure" and others, to one degree or another representing a threat to the living. Associations arising from surnames Kovalenko and Boyko and the way these characters behave in the story evoke in us the idea of ​​certain perverted values ​​of the social world, which allows us to attribute the heroes bearing these names to the class of life-threatening objects.

Shaparenko should also be included in this class. Surname Shaparenko formed from a noun shapar (shafar), which means:

As can be seen from the dialogue between the hero and the store manager, their relationship is far from monetary. In camp conditions, the “key keeper” is the king, and the prisoner convicted under Article 58 is nobody. Surname Shaparenko does not evoke ideas of perverted values, but in the context of the story it acquires a negative connotation.

So, the positive values ​​are perverted and the negative ones "thrive".

It should be noted that V. Shalamov does not draw a clear line between prisoners and camp staff, opposing victims and executioners, referring some to the class of the living, and others to the class of life-threatening objects. The head of the mine, Ryabov, appears together with Kovalenko from a cloud of frosty steam, but (partly due to his surname) cannot be assigned to the class to which Kovalenko and Boyko belong. His further behavior confirms this: he does not take part in the "destruction", and his "profound" remark that bowlers are a sign of contentment, equates him rather with the wife of the hero-narrator, who apparently had no idea that what happened in reality. Let us also recall that the hero-narrator almost dies from being hit by a log. And this blow is dealt to him by none other than one of prisoners.

Fundamental, fundamental in the story is another opposition: the class of the living and the class of objects that in one way or another threaten the living. Associated with the first class are - besides white - various colors (including black), a certain shape, and in addition - everything is dirty. The second class should include everything that threatens life: ice, cold, frost, everything pure is somehow connected with it, as well as such negative human qualities as cowardice / fear, “destructiveness”. Logically, with the first class, we must associate such positive qualities as courage, masculinity, and creativity. Associations with them give rise to proper names, but they do not materialize in the story. We will not find /84/ any positive feelings, properties or values ​​among the heroes of the story, they do not even have passive sympathy. When butter and bread are stolen from the narrator, the prisoners react to this "with malicious joy" (25). E. Shklovsky noted that Shalamov has very few stories in which an unbroken person is depicted. Positive qualities/values exist in Shalamov's universe, but in his stories they, as a rule, do not find a concrete embodiment.

Philological notes - Voronezh, 2001. - Issue. 17. - S. 78-85.

Notes

All rights to distribute and use the works of Varlam Shalamov belong to A.L. The use of materials is possible only with the consent of the editors [email protected] website. The site was created in 2008-2009. funded by the grant of the Russian Humanitarian Foundation No. 08-03-12112v.

© L.V. Zharavin, 2006

V. SHALAMOV AND N. GOGOL (BY THE MATERIAL OF THE STORY "PACKAGE")

L.V. Zharavin

The complex and sometimes frankly negative attitude of Varlam Shalamov towards the literary tradition is well known. Considering himself “an innovator of tomorrow”1, he emphasized: “... I had such a reserve of novelty that I was not afraid of any repetition ... I simply did not need to use someone else’s scheme, someone else’s comparisons, someone else’s plot, someone else’s idea if I could and have presented my own literary passport”2. And at the same time, the writer was aware that a true artist cannot do without relying on tradition, since history repeats itself, therefore, “any execution of the thirty-seventh year can be repeated”3.

Of course, it is not the business of the researcher to "catch" the author on contradictions, to which a great artist has the right. We can only talk about the development of methods for analyzing the text, to a certain extent adequate to the originality and at the same time the organic nature of the artistic concept in a broad historical and cultural context. And Shalamov himself determined the path along which research thought should be directed, dropping the phrase: “A story is a palimpsest that keeps all its secrets”4.

Indeed, literary scholars have repeatedly emphasized the complex intertextual game behind Shalamov’s short and sonorous phrase “like a slap in the face”, the presence of archetypical matrices and symbols. widespread intertext. In our opinion, they correlate with each other as private and general: a palimpsest is a kind of intertext, its specific form, which, in addition to broad allusion, citation, dialogism and other well-known characteristics, implies clearly expressed structural features of the work. Namely: the phenomenon of palimpsest is formed on the basis of the meaning

mental self-enrichment mainly on the principle of a paradigm (not a syntagma). Through the contours of the present, the contours of the other-time appear, spiraling deepening the artistic image. This is similar to the phenomenon of permafrost (a layered "pie" of earth and ice), the circles of Dante's hell arranged helically - one under the other, etc. In the aspect of our problem, it is advisable to refer to the semantic method developed by Y. Kristeva, based on emphasizing precisely the vertical “text-forming axis”: ““ Text ” - be it poetic, literary or any other - drills through the surface of speaking a certain vertical, on which one should look for models of that signifying activity that ordinary representative and communicative speech does not talk about , although it marks them...”6. We will have in mind such an undeclared, not written literally, but nevertheless marked, and therefore outlined semantic vertical, noting the “presence” of Gogol in Shalamov’s Kolyma prose.

To some extent, Shalamov's prose can also be approached in the light of the phenomenon of "white" ("zero") writing (R. Barth), which implies the rejection of the author from stereotypes while it is objectively impossible to function outside of them. The "secondary memory of the word" permeates the new material with "residual magnetic currents"7. So the Kolyma epic is written by Shalamov on not completely “scraped off” pretexts, which not only come to life in a different historical and artistic dimension, but also allow us to translate the language of humiliation and destruction of the 20th century into the language of universal concepts.

As an example of a palimpsest “with an eye” on Gogol, we have chosen a short story “The Parcel”, the plot of which is expediently reproduced in three key moments.

The main character, on behalf of whom the story is being told, received a long-awaited package, which unexpectedly turned out to be not sugar and mainland shag, but pilot's cloaks and two or three handfuls of prunes. Burki had to be sold: they would have taken it anyway. With the proceeds, the prisoner bought bread and butter, and wanted to share a meal with the former assistant of Kirov, Semyon Sheinin. But when he, delighted, ran for boiling water, the hero was hit on the head with something heavy. When he woke up, he no longer saw his bag. “Everyone remained in their places and looked at me with malicious joy” (vol. 1, p. 25). Having again come to the stall and begging only for bread, the prisoner returned to the barracks, "melted the snow" and, no longer sharing with anyone, began to cook parcel prunes. However, at this time the doors opened, "from the cloud of frosty steam" came the head of the camp and the head of the mine. Rushing to the stove and waving a pick, one of them knocked over all the bowlers, breaking through the bottom of them. After the departure of the authorities, they began to collect "each his own": "We ate everything at once - it was the most reliable way." After swallowing a few berries, the hero fell asleep: “The dream was like oblivion” (vol. 1, p. 26). Thus ended the main story. But the story is not over: another storyline develops in parallel. In the middle of the night, tenants burst into the room and throw something “not moving” on the floor (vol. 1, p. 26). It was Yefremov, the barrack duty officer beaten for stealing firewood, who, after lying quietly for many weeks on the bunk, “died in an invalid town. He was repulsed “inside” - there were many masters of this business at the mine” (vol. 1, p. 27).

It would seem that the initial situation - receiving a package with cloaks - is extremely extraordinary. In fact, the events described (theft, beatings, the evil joy of "comrades" from the fact that someone is worse off, the aggressive cynicism of the camp authorities, finally, death from beatings) is not something exceptional, but cruel everyday life, in principle, is not at all associated with obtaining rare and expensive shoes. “Why do I need burqas? You can wear burkas here only on holidays - there were no holidays. If only reindeer pims, torbasas or ordinary felt boots…” the character thought in bewilderment (vol. 1, p. 24). In the same way, readers may naturally be perplexed: what does the cloaks have to do with it? Why are the questions of good and evil, freedom and violence so persistently associated by the author with an unusual object, thing?

The answer to this question is quite simple. The unifying power of the camp lay in the fact that it was impossible to distinguish a former party worker, member of the Comintern, a hero of the Spanish war from a Russian writer or an illiterate collective farmer: “indistinguishable from each other neither in clothes, nor in voice, nor frostbite spots on the cheeks, nor frostbite blisters on the fingers ”(vol. 2, p. 118), with the same hungry gleam in his eyes. Homo sapiens has become Homo somatis - the camp man. Nevertheless, there was a difference, and it was, paradoxically, a property difference. It would seem, what kind of property can we talk about, if even after death the prisoners could not claim the last clothes - a coffin, which is popularly called a "wooden sheepskin coat"? Nevertheless, a sweater, scarf, felt boots, underwear, a blanket and other things that were preserved or sent from the outside acquired magical significance, became almost the main source of life. Firstly, they exuded warmth, and secondly, they easily exchanged for bread and smoke (“Night”) and therefore were not only an object of envy and profit, but also the cause of the death of the prisoner (“For a show”). And even the gloves of the chief Anisimov, depending on the season - leather or fur, with which he used to beat in the face, turned out to be more humane than fists, sticks, lashes, and the like, if only because they did not leave bruises on the prisoners' faces ("Two meetings"; vol. 2, pp. 119-120). Unlike A. Solzhenitsyn, Shalamov did not harbor any illusions about the possibility of a heroic opposition of the individual to general corruption, not seeing a fundamental difference between the ideal and the material, consciousness and being. The humiliation of the flesh by exhausting labor, cold and hunger led directly to the corruption of the spirit. And therefore, in his artistic world, elementary material attributes, in particular dress and shoes, are organically inscribed in the system of the most complex intellectual and ethical categories. And not only in art. “On his return (from the camp. - LJ) he saw that he had to buy gloves and boots for a number more, and a cap - for a number less”8 - this fact was perceived by the author as direct evidence of intellectual degradation. Shalamov also expressed his negative attitude towards abstract (liberal) humanism with a “reified” aphorism: “How

As soon as I hear the word “good,” I take my hat and leave.”9

But the point is not only in the peculiarities of Shalamov's camp experience: from time immemorial, a Russian person called property good without dividing the narrow material and broad spiritual content. Attire (clothing, clothes), deed (good deed, good deed), virtue are words of the same root. A good touch of the Good 10 materializes through the outer vestment. Clothing and shoes, as it were, become localizers of the highest metaphysical meaning, conductors of a miracle, which the biblical tradition insistently emphasizes. “Fortress and beauty are her clothes” - it is said in the Proverbs of Solomon (31:25); “... He clothed me in garments of salvation, clothed me with a garment of righteousness...” (Isaiah 61:10); “Stand therefore, having girded your loins with truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and having shod your feet in readiness to proclaim peace” (Eph. 6:14-15), etc. Finally, let us remember that the bleeding woman was healed by touching the edge of the Savior’s tunic, “... for she said: even if I touch His clothes, I will be healed. And immediately her fountain of blood dried up...” (Mark 5:28-29).

Thus, it turns out that the removal of only the initial, lying on the surface layer (layer) of Shalamov's narrative (cloaks sent from the outside) reveals the semantic multi-stage artistic reality in everyday, cultural and religious aspects.

But that's not all. Most of the prisoners, especially those from another stage, were not called by their last names (vol. 2, p. 118), and this was natural. But the act of nominating a wearable item, elevating it to the level of a proper name (the stories "Tie", "Princess Gagarina's Necklace", "Glove", "Gold Medal", "Cross", the analyzed text could well have been called "Burki") do it is expedient to use Gogol's "Overcoat" as a pretext. Shalamov, of course, does not have any hint of this story. Nevertheless, in the light of the palimpsest phenomenon, it is quite possible to capture the general outlines of the situation recreated by Gogol in the space of Shalamov's narrative.

Indeed, in Kolyma, Shalamov's character needs warm, reliable footwear just as much as Gogol's Akaky Akakievich Bashmachkin needs a new overcoat. They have a common enemy that needs to be fought: "our northern frost" not only gives "strength

sharp and prickly clicks indiscriminately on all noses”11, but it is also a synonym for death: to go “into the cold” means to go into oblivion (vol. 2, p. 113). In the conditions of the St. Petersburg winter, a warm new thing is long-awaited, like a parcel from the mainland, but it is stolen, just as food was stolen from a prisoner. Barely alive, the latter hastily swallows prunes scattered in the mud, as he once “hurriedly slurped his cabbage soup ... without noticing their taste at all, ate it all with flies” (Gogol; vol. 3, p. 180) Akaky Akakievich. Employees of the department mocked the poor official to their heart's content, not hearing the piercing cry of his soul: "I am your brother" (Gogol; vol. 3, p. 178). And for the Kolyma prisoners, the loss of a bag of groceries was "the best entertainment." Even thirty years later, Shalamov's character clearly remembered the "evil joyful faces" of his "comrades" (vol. 1, p. 26), as he once "shuddered many times ... then in his lifetime, seeing how much inhumanity is in a person ... ”, a young clerk, touched by the defenselessness of the Gogol official (Gogol; vol. 3, p. 178). Shalamov's story also develops the idea of ​​"one's own place" beloved by Gogol. Akaky Akakievich behaved in the highest degree unreasonable, not "according to order", bypassing intermediate authorities and asking directly to a "significant person", for which he was punished with a deadly fever. In the Kolyma camp, a similar logic of "one's own place" operates, the sacred mysticism of the rank. Thus, the character of the “Parcel”, knowing well that it is “too chic for him to walk in pilot’s cloaks “with rubber soles” ... This is not appropriate” (vol. 1, p. 24), decides, getting rid of them, to avoid the robbed or beaten.

Yes, and the head of the mine, Ryabov, is functionally the same significant person: by his grace, Akaki Akakievich fell into a fever and delirium, and the Shalamov prisoners lost their last crumbs of food. Describing his sudden appearance in the barracks, Shalamov again returns to the theme of the ill-fated cloaks: it suddenly seemed to the hero that Ryabov was in his aviation cloaks - “in my cloaks!” (vol. 1, p. 26).

It turns out that the “replacement” of the title of Shalamov’s story “The Parcel” with the proposed “Burki” is possible for at least two reasons: firstly, for the role that the thing plays in the plot organization of the text; secondly, in the tone of the name Bashmachkin beaten by Gogol: “Already by the very name

it is clear that it once descended from a shoe ... ”(Gogol; vol. 3, p. 175). Of course, there is a difference: in the reality of Kolyma, of course, there would be many “hunters” for the “legacy” of Akaky Akakievich: three pairs of socks, a worn-out hood, ten sheets of official paper, two or three buttons from pantaloons, yes, probably , and a bunch of goose feathers (Gogol; v. 3, p. 211). And in the light of the story “At Night” (two prisoners are digging up a fresh burial in order to remove underwear from a dead man), the assumption of a secondary robbery of a poor official is not at all absurd - already in the grave.

But the point, of course, is not in the manipulation of quotes and not only in individual plot-figurative convergences, but in the very concept of being, formulated by Gogol harshly and unambiguously: the misfortune that "unbearably fell" on the head of a little man is similar to the troubles that fall "on the kings and rulers of the world” (Gogol; vol. 3, p. 212). In Shalamov, through the most complex system of associations, Scythian settlements are transferred “to the stones of Kolyma” and the same parallel arises: “... the Scythians buried kings in mausoleums, and millions of nameless hard workers closely lay down in the mass graves of Kolyma” (vol. 2, p. 324 ). As a result, an impossible conclusion arises at the first reading of the Kolyma Tales: “all this is thoroughly saturated with the smell of Akaky Akakievich’s “overcoat”” (a characteristic given by N.G. Chernyshevsky to stories from the folk life of Grigorovich and Turgenev)12.

However, in the light of the theory of palimpsest and the methodology of semantic analysis, Shalamov's texts, as noted above, are paradigmatic, that is, the general artistic meaning is distributed vertically and the same event at different levels of the paradigm can have different meanings, which makes possible mutually exclusive interpretations. Gogol's story, which "shines through" Shalamov's lines, first of all, provides a traditional anthropological and humanistic key to the narrative, which coincides with the general Christian orientation of Russian culture. In this regard, indeed: "We all came out of the Overcoat." Nevertheless, "Kolyma Tales" reproduces many situations that involve active rethinking, and sometimes open polemics with traditional humanism.

This is evidenced by the fate of the secondary character of the story - the duty officer

Yefremov, who was beaten to death for stealing firewood needed to heat the barracks. If for the prisoners “to receive a parcel was a miracle of miracles” (vol. 1, p. 23), an event that excites the imagination of those around them, then the death of anyone was perceived indifferently, as something quite expected and natural. And the point is not only in the atrophy of the moral sense, but also in the peculiarities of camp ideas about crime and punishment, which sometimes do not agree with Christian morality and go into the depths of the herd psychology. For example, according to the mythology of many Slavic peoples, arson and theft of bees was a great (mortal) sin, but the murder of the abductor himself was not included in this category of mortal sins, on the contrary, it was encouraged, since it was not people who took revenge, but nature itself - a blind ruthless element. Shalamov has, in essence, a similar logic: beating for theft, committed not for personal reasons, but for the sake of the common good (to heat the stove so that everyone is warm), does not cause indignation either in others or in the beaten man himself: “He did not complain - he lay and groaned softly” (vol. 1, p. 27). “He will know how to steal other people’s firewood” (vol. 1, p. 27), the foremen clearly agreed with this measure of punishment, “people in white sheepskin coats, smelling from newness, unwornness” (vol. 1, p. 26). Let us pay attention: not only is the Christian semantics of the dress, which was mentioned above, not only re-emphasized, but also changed. New white sheepskin coats stink of being unworn, thus revealing that their wearers are goats in sheep's clothing, false pastors dressed in white robes of justice. However, at the same time, the behavior of Efremov himself, resigned to his fate, is an indicator of irreversible mental changes that devalue the personality. Let us recall that Akaky Akakievich, even being in a delirium of a fever, protested as best he could: accompanying Your Excellency's appeal with "the most terrible words", after which the old mistress was baptized (Gogol; vol. 3, p. 211). “Something alive, grunting”, a “lump of dirty rags” dumped on the floor (vol. 1, p. 26) is a creature that has lost its human form in the act of sacrifice to Moloch (as evidenced by the seme of fire - the need to kindle the furnace). Moreover, there was a "replacement" of the victim - a pure lamb for an unclean pig, a despised animal. But then naturally

that in such a context, no one could have thought of universal brotherhood, as it came to the mind of a young clerk who felt sorry for Akaky Akakievich, and even mockery of a small official against the background of Shalamov seems to be only stupid jokes of youngsters.

Moreover, in the light of the situation described by Shalamov, poor Akaki Akakievich appears as a completely extraordinary person in his, even if ridiculous, dream of becoming a step higher in the social hierarchy: “Fire sometimes showed in his eyes, even the most daring and courageous thoughts flashed in his head: not to put a marten on the collar for sure, ”as befits a general (Gogol; vol. 3, p. 193). The audacity of Shalamov's character was also originally truly heroic: "I will smoke, I will treat everyone, everyone, everyone ..." (vol. 1, pp. 23-24). But there was no shag in the package, so the prisoner decided to share bread and butter with an equally hungry brother. When this attempt failed, the idea of ​​further division of miserable crumbs could no longer enter anyone's head.

So who are the characters of the Kolyma Tales - martyrs, sufferers, innocent victims of a bloody historical experiment or people who have long crossed the "last line", beyond which, according to the author, "there is nothing human in a person, but only distrust , malice and lies” (vol. 1, p. 21)?

The answer to this question is variable and depends on the level of paradigm at which Shalam's text is considered. But after all, Gogol's "The Overcoat" is no less problematic in this regard. Already during the life of the author, the work in defense of the humiliated and offended was perceived by one of them - the hero of Dostoevsky (the novel "Poor People") - as a "libel", a "malicious book", where "everything is printed, read, ridiculed, slandered"13 . N.G. Chernyshevsky, without denying that Bashmachkin was a victim of the insensitivity, vulgarity and rudeness of those around him, at the same time added that he was “a total ignoramus and a complete idiot, incapable of anything”, although “it is useless and shameless to tell the whole truth about Akaky Akakievich”14 . In the future, they tried to tell the whole truth. V.V. Rozanov made of Gogol the antipode of Pushkin, who threw "brilliant and criminal slander on human nature", and wrote about the "animal" Akaki Akaki-

15. According to Andrey Bely, Bashmachkin, with his idea of ​​an eternal overcoat on thick cotton wool, is "exhibited in the inhumanity of his ideals"16. B.M. Eikhenbaum insisted that the famous “humane place” was nothing more than a “difference in intonation”, “intonation pause”, compositional and playful device 17. On the contrary, literary critics of the Soviet period emphasized in every possible way that Gogol’s story is “a humane manifesto in defense of man 18 or they created a myth about Bashmachkin as a "terrible avenger" similar to Captain Kopeikin19. The Italian scholar C. de Lotto proposed an interesting version of reading the "Overcoat" through the prism of patristic writings. The “Ladder of Paradise” by St. John of the Ladder and the “Ustav” by Nil Sorsky, in particular, make it possible to interpret the classic work as a story of the physical and spiritual death of a servant of God who succumbed to demons and changed his purpose - to be simple and humble20. L.V. Karasev, on the contrary, believes that “from an ontological point of view” the story tells only “about the problems of the body” and it is the overcoat, as a “different form of the body”, and not its owner, that is the bearer of “vital meaning”21.

Who, then, is Akaky Akakievich - a saint, meekly carrying the cross laid by God, or a sinner deceived by the devil? Homo sapiens or "perfect idiot"? Mannequin for an overcoat? And the problem here, as with Shalamov, is not the choice of one parameter: Gogol's story is the same paradigmatic text as Kolyma's prose. But if the paradigmality of Kolyma prose is clearly realized in the "layer cake" of permafrost, then the multi-stage "Overcoat" is really a ladder ("ladder"), which was repeatedly said by the Gogol-ladies. But in both cases, both in Gogol and in Shalamov, the possibility of semantic movement up or down is open, although not unlimited.

And here we come to, perhaps, the most difficult question - about the nature of Shalamov's anthropologism, about its relationship with Christian humanism, the consistent bearer of which Gogol is rightly considered.

A. Solzhenitsyn's associate D. Panin (Sologdin's prototype) expressed his "distrust" of Kolyma prose sharply and unequivocally: "...the most important thing is missing - details, and there are no thoughts that meet

such painful experiences, as if he [Sha-lamov] were describing horses”22. But hardly anyone could say more harshly than the writer himself: “Man is an infinitely insignificant creature, humiliatingly vile, cowardly ... The limits of meanness in man are unlimited. A cat can change the world, but not a person. It would seem unfair and wrong. But after all, Gogol, in the first edition of The Overcoat, called his character “a very kind animal” (Gogol; vol. 3, p. 476), and later, touchingly describing the death of “a creature not protected by anyone, not dear to anyone,” did not fail to add : not interesting even for a natural scientist, "who does not miss putting an ordinary fly on a pin and examining it through a microscope" (Gogol; vol. 3, pp. 211-212). According to this logic, the hero of "The Overcoat" is "even smaller than a fly" (as it is said on another occasion in "Dead Souls"). It would seem, what kind of God-calling of a Homo sapiens in such cases it is expedient to speak, if a horse, a cat, a fly (it is easy to continue the series) are not only more interesting, but also, like other animals, according to Shalamov, are made “of the best material ... "(vol. 4, p. 361). And yet there is nothing blasphemous in such comparisons.

“A characteristic feature of Christian anthropology is the refusal to perceive a person as “naturally good”, as well as the rejection of such a view of a person who considers him as a being vicious by his very nature,” writes a modern theologian. 24 good”, starting from Charles Darwin and drawing a distinction between people and animals as different levels of a single created world on the basis of a moral feeling, singled out the emotions inherent in a person: shame, pity, reverence 25. Anthropologist Max Scheler, deeply revered by Christian theology, put forward another fundamental postulate: “Compared to the animal, which always says “yes” to real being, even if it gets scared and runs, a person is the one who can say “no”...”26. Of course, this does not mean demonically inspired rebellion - in the spirit of Ivan Karamazov, but the ability to dispose of the highest gift - freedom given to a person by the act of birth.

But again, is this what we see in the Kolyma world with its lost or altered values? Feelings of shame and compassion are atrophied in the majority.

From freedom, understood as the need to say "no" not only to lentils, but to any stew, Homo somatis, of course, voluntarily refused. Three weeks later, the people of Kolyma “weaned forever” from the noble motives brought from freedom (vol. 2, p. 110). But still, the third component of the phenomenon of humanity remained - reverence for the inexplicable and higher: for the conscientiousness and professionalism of such doctors as Fedor Efimovich Loskutov (the story "Courses"), the spiritual fortress of the "churchmen" who served mass in a snowy forest ("Day off") , and, of course, before the mercy of nature, which, living according to its own laws, but being also the creation of God, did not leave man in his inhumanity. Shalamov called the tree of hope the only evergreen dwarf in the Far North, courageous and stubborn. Speaking “about the south, about warmth, about life,” he extended this life: “dwarf firewood is hotter” (vol. 1, p. 140). “Nature is subtler than man in its sensations” (v. 1, p. 140), and therefore there is no contradiction in the fact that the mountains, in the faces of which thousands of hard workers perished, “stood around like praying knees” (v. 2, p. 426).

Of course, the abyss between the God-striving of the Christian dogma and the base reality of "human tragedies" was infinitely great. “Putting the Gospel in my pocket, I thought only about one thing: would they give me dinner today” (vol. 1, pp. 237-238), - the autobiographical character of the story “The Unconverted” admits without any cunning. However, it was probably no coincidence that he managed to see “Roman stars” through a frayed blanket and compare the incomparable: the “drawing of the starry sky” of the Far North with the gospel (vol. 2, p. 292). This is not about a game of imagination, but about spiritual insight, the presence of which is proved in the story "Athenian Nights" by referring to the fifth, not taken into account by any forecasters, the need for poetry, which brought the heroes almost physiological bliss (vol. 2, p. 405 -406). But after all, Akakiy Akakievich's "bestiality", "idiocy", "inhumanity" of interests, and the like - from a religious point of view - are spiritually filled phenomena, behind which stand gentleness, non-genderism, evangelical poverty of spirit, the height of dispassion and, as a result, "inability to comprehend the strategy of evil."27 The latter is also true in relation to the Kolyma residents. Outwit the camp authorities, that is, the devil himself, with

no one succeeded in making their existence easier: those who took care of themselves by cunning, deceit, and denunciation perished before others. And poor Akaky Akakievich, like the Shalamov martyrs, was distinguished by "signs" incomprehensible to most. This is a small bald spot on the forehead, wrinkles on both sides of the cheeks and a complexion that is called "hemorrhoidal" (Gogol; vol. 3, p. 174). Kolyma-chan is doomed to wear "a stain of frostbite, an indelible brand, an indelible brand!" (vol. 2, p. 114). These are, no doubt, signs of slavish humiliation, but the one pointed to by the Beatitudes: “Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted” (Matt. 5:4). Christian humanism is not exhausted by the elementary emotion of mercy, and the apophatic form of its manifestations is equal to the cataphatic one.

From here, one more plot-emotional turn in the story "The Parcel" becomes explainable. Excluding on the part of fellow camps the emotion of pity towards a person in a “state of trans-humanity” (vol. 4, p. 374), Shalamov emphasizes the author’s sympathy for the “suffering” of a plywood box: , fell to the floor, split” (vol. 1, p. 23). The parcel from the outside is the same "bright guest" as the overcoat for Akaky Akakievich; not just an object of desire, but an object-subject, spiritualized and individualized: split plywood broke, cracked, screamed in a special “not such a voice” as “local trees” (vol. 1, p. 23).

And here again a parallel arises not in favor of the camp person: the cracked box “screams”, that is, it has its own voice, while the mercilessly beaten camp prisoner who collapsed to the floor, without complaining, “quietly” groans and imperceptibly dies. If the package is an “unexpected joy” from another, full-fledged life, then Efremov is a “package” from hell, personifying death. His “inside” was also beaten off, but unlike the food that spilled out from the “skillfully” thrown plywood boxes, which became the property of people “with clean hands in overly neat military uniforms” (vol. 1, p. 23), Efremov’s “inside” no one didn't care. The character, as it was, remained a thing in itself, forever hiding the names of its killers. Comparing two stories that are not related to each other causally, but correspond to each other, we have an almost adequate illustration of

G. Bachelard’s judgments about the importance of the theme of boxes, chests, locks and the like in literature: “here, truly, is the organ of the secret life of the soul”, “the model of the innermost”, directly correlated with the inner world of a literary hero 28.

However, Akaky Akakievich also had a small box “with a hole cut in the lid”, where he used to set aside a penny from each spent ruble (Gogol; vol. 3, p. 191). But the hero nevertheless took his main secret with him into a pine coffin (box-domovina) - the secret of his true "I": either this is a harmless official who turned into a formidable robber a few days after death, or a demon in human form, or really the living dead, materialized in the imagination of frightened townsfolk? Indeed, in essence, on the basis of a similar emotional-psychological matrix, the wilted (officially accepted name) peasant souls materialize in Gogol's poem. They will have fun in the wild, drinking and cheating the bar, "jumping" out of Chichikov's cherished box.

So, in the aspect of the Shalamov-Gogol parallel, the story of the mailbox gives grounds to move from The Overcoat to Dead Souls. Sacralization touched not only the Chichikov casket with a double bottom, secret places for papers and money, many partitions, etc. In essence, the theme of the box as a keeper of good or bad news runs through the entire work. "The grace of God in the boxes of fat officials" - not at all ironically noticed by the author (Gogol; vol. 5, p. 521). In "tender conversations" some wives called their successful husbands "pods" (v. 5, p. 224). A drawer, among other rubbish, snatched out the sharp eye of Pavel Ivanovich in Plyushkin's house. At the housekeeping Nastasya Petrovna, chests of drawers were securely covered with many sacks of money. But this heroine with a “talking” surname should be discussed separately. The box, moreover, “club-headed”, that is, as if closed with a heavy oak coffin lid, is the main casket, reliably protected from prying eyes and at the same time voluntarily “split” under the pressure of a secret bursting from the inside: after all, it was she who initiated the exposure Chichikov the swindler.

Varlam Shalamov considered it appropriate to divide literature into two categories: literary

ru "prostheses" and the literature of the "magic crystal". The first comes from "straightforward realism" and, according to the writer, is not capable of reflecting the tragic state of the world. Only the “magic crystal” makes it possible to see the “incompatibility of phenomena”, their irresolvable conflict conjugation: “A tragedy where nothing is corrected, where a crack goes through the very core”29. In Shalamov, as in Gogol, realities and associations of different levels (socio-historical, religious, literary and artistic, etc.), subordinated to each being self-sufficient, are distributed along the central axis of the “magic crystal”. As a result, it turns out - from the “split” Korobochka, which flooded the city with fears and horrors, from the opened pine coffin, from which Akaky Akakiyevich got up, really or virtually, in order to regain his own, from Maxim Telyatnikov and Abakum Fyrov, who despised the constipation of the Chichikov box (of the same coffin), to Shalamov's Efremov with a beaten "inside" and a split parcel, groaning like a human being, the emotional, artistic and historical distance is not so great. The split that runs through the “core” of individual destinies is an expression of the existential tragedy of Russia.

NOTES

1 Shalamov V.T. New book: Memoirs. Notebooks. Correspondence. Investigative cases. M., 2004. S. 358.

2 Ibid. S. 839.

3 Ibid. S. 362.

4 Shalamov V.T. Sobr. cit.: In 4 vols. Vol. 2. M., 1998. S. 219. Further references to this edition are given in the text in parentheses, indicating the volume and page number.

5 See: Alanovich F. On the semantic functions of intertextual connections in Varlam Shalamov's Kolyma Tales // IV Shalamov Readings. M., 1997. S. 40-52; Volkova E.V. Aesthetic phenomenon of Varlam Shalamov // Ibid. pp. 7-8; Leiderman N. "... In a blizzard chilling age": About the "Kolyma stories" // Ural. 1992. No. 3. S. 171-182; Mikhailik E. Another coast.

"The Last Fight of Major Pugachev": the Problem of Context // New Literary Review. 1997. No. 28. pp. 209-222; and etc.

6 Kristeva Y. Destruction of aesthetics: Fav. tr.: Per. from fr. M., 2004. S. 341.

7 Bart R. Zero degree of writing // Semiotics: Anthology / Comp. Yu.S. Stepanov. M.; Yekaterinburg, 2001, pp. 330-334.

8 Shalamov V.T. New book ... S. 270.

9 Ibid. S. 881.

10 Kolesov V.V. Ancient Russia: heritage in the word. In 5 books. Book. 2. Good and evil. SPb., 2001. S. 64.

11 Gogol N.V. Collected works of art: In 5 vols. T. 3. M., 1952. S. 182. Further references to this edition are given in the text, indicating the volume and page numbers in parentheses.

12 Chernyshevsky N.G. Literary criticism: In 2 vols. T. 2. M., 1981. S. 217.

13 Dostoevsky F.M. Full coll. cit.: In 30 vols. T. 1. L., 1972. S. 63.

14 Chernyshevsky N.G. Decree. op. S. 216.

15 Rozanov V.V. How did the type of Akaky Akakievich originate // Russian Bulletin. 1894. No. 3. S. 168.

16 Bely A. Gogol's Mastery: Research. M., 1996. S. 30.

17 Eikhenbaum B.M. About prose: Sat. Art. L., 1969. S. 320-323.

18 Makogonenko G.P. Gogol and Pushkin. L., 1985. S. 304.

19 History of Russian Literature: In 4 vols. T. 2. L., 1981. S. 575.

20 Lotto Ch. de. Ladder "Overcoat": [Foreword. to publ. I.P. Zolotussky] // Questions of Philosophy. 1993. No. 8. S. 58-83.

21 Karasev L.V. The substance of literature. M., 2001.

22 Panin D.M. Sobr. cit.: In 4 vols. T. 1. M., 2001. S. 212.

23 Shalamov V.T. New book ... S. 884.

24 Philaret, Metropolitan of Minsk and Slutsk. Orthodox doctrine of man // Orthodox doctrine of man: Selected. Art. M.; Klin, 2004, p. 15.

25 Soloviev V.S. Sobr. cit.: In 2 vols. T. 1. M., 1988. S. 124 et seq.

26 Scheler M. The position of man in space // The problem of man in Western European philosophy. M., 1988. S. 65.

27 Lotto Ch. de. Decree. op. S. 69.

28 Bashlyar G. Poetics of Space: Selected. M., 2000. S. 23.

29 Shalamov V.T. New book ... S. 878.

The article is posted on a hard-to-reach Internet resource in the pdf extension, I duplicate it here.

Documentary artistry of the stories "The Parcel" by V.T. Shalamov and "Sanochki" G.S. Zhzhenova

The article is related to the topic of the Kolyma hard labor camps and is devoted to the analysis of the documentary and artistic world of the stories “The Parcel” by V.T. Shalamov and "Sanochki" G.S. Zhzhenova.

The exposition of Shalamov's story "The Parcel" directly introduces the main event of the narrative - the receipt by one of the prisoners of the parcel: "The parcels were given out on duty. Brigadiers certify the identity of the recipient. Plywood broke and cracked in its own way, like plywood. The local trees did not break like that, they did not shout with such a voice. It is no coincidence that the sound of parcel plywood is compared with the sound of breaking Kolyma trees, as if symbolizing two different polar modes of human life - life in the wild and life in prison. “Diversity of polarity” is clearly felt in another equally important circumstance: a convict who comes to receive a parcel notices behind the barrier people “with clean hands in overly neat military uniforms” . The contrast from the very beginning puts an insurmountable barrier between the disenfranchised prisoners and those who stand above them - the arbiters of their destinies. The attitude of the "masters" to the "slaves" is also noted in the outset of the plot, and bullying of the convict will vary until the end of the story, forming a kind of event constant, emphasizing the absolute lack of rights of the ordinary inhabitant of the Stalinist forced labor camp.

The article deals with the GULAG theme. The author made an attempt to analyze the documentary and fi ction worlds of the two stories.

LITERATURE

1. Zhzhenov G.S. Sanochki // From "Capercaillie" to "Firebird": a story and stories. - M.: Sovremennik, 1989.
2. Cress Vernon. Zecameron of the 20th century: a novel. - M.: Artist. lit., 1992.
3. Shalamov V.T. Collected works. In 4 vols. T. 1 // comp., prepared. text and notes. I. Sirotinskaya. - M.: Artist. lit., 1998.
4. Shalamov V.T. Collected works. In 4 vols. T. 2 // comp., prepared. text and notes. I. Sirotinskaya. - M.: Artist. lit., 1998.
5. Schiller F.P. Letters from the dead house / comp., trans. with him., note., afterword. V.F. Diesendorf. - M.: Society. acad. Sciences grew up. Germans, 2002.

NOTES

1. Note that dreams about food, about bread, do not give the hungry prisoner in the camp peace: “I slept and still saw my constant Kolyma dream - loaves of bread floating through the air, filling all the houses, all the streets, the whole earth.”
2. Philologist F.P. Schiller wrote to his family in 1940 from a camp in Nakhodka Bay: “If you haven’t sent boots and a top shirt yet, then don’t send it, otherwise I’m afraid that you will send something completely inappropriate.”
3. Shalamov recalls this incident both in “Essays on the Underworld” and in the story “Tombstone”: “Burki cost seven hundred, but it was a bargain.<…>And I bought a whole kilo of butter in the store.<…>I also bought some bread…”
4. Due to the constant hunger of prisoners and exhausting hard work, the diagnosis of "alimentary dystrophy" in the camps was a common occurrence. This became fertile ground for making adventures on an unprecedented scale: “all products that were out of storage were written off to the camp.”
5. Something similar to this feeling is experienced by the hero-narrator of the story “Conspiracy of Lawyers”: “I have not yet been pushed out in this brigade. There were people weaker than me, and this brought some kind of calm, some kind of unexpected joy. Kolyma resident Vernon Kress writes about human psychology in such conditions: “We were pushed by our comrades, because the sight of a person who has come down always acts irritatingly on a healthier person, he guesses his own future in him and, moreover, is drawn to find an even more defenseless one, to recoup on him.<...>» .
6. Not only the blatari loved theatricality, other representatives of the camp population also had an interest in it.

Cheslav Gorbachevsky, South Ural State University

Help find an analysis of any "Kolyma story" by V. T. Shalamov and got the best answer

Answer from LEGE artis[guru]
Varlam Shalamov is rightly considered the pioneer of the camp theme in Russian literature of the 20th century. But it turned out that his works became known to the reader after the publication of A. compared with her And it immediately catches the eye: Shalamov is tougher, more merciless, more unambiguous in describing the horrors of the Gulag than Solzhenitsyn
In One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich and in The Gulag Archipelago, there are many examples of human baseness, meanness, and hypocrisy. Nevertheless, Solzhenitsyn notes that it was mainly those who had already been prepared for this in the wild who were prepared to learn flattery that succumbed to moral corruption in the camp , lies, "small and large meanness" is possible everywhere, but a person must remain a person even in the most difficult and cruel conditions. Moreover, Solzhenitsyn shows that humiliation and trials awaken inner reserves in a person and spiritually free him
In "Kolyma Tales" (1954-1973) Shalamov, on the contrary, tells how the convicts quickly lost their former "face" and often the beast was more merciful, fairer and kinder than them.
And indeed, the characters in Shalamov, as a rule. lose faith in goodness and justice, represent their souls morally and spiritually devastated, the writer concludes, “turn up to complete corruption” “In the camp, it’s every man for himself,” the prisoners “immediately learned not to stand up for each other.” In the barracks, the author notes, disputes often arose, and they all ended almost always the same way -
fights. “But the participants in these disputes are former professors, party members, collective farmers, military leaders.” According to Shalamov, there is moral and physical pressure in the camp, under the influence of which "everyone can become a thief from hunger."